Algona
Well-Known Member
Reducto ad absurdum: If everyone plunders, then no one would build goods buildings, so there would be no goods to plunder.
Useless Maxim: The maximum amount of goods in a neighborhood is based on the number of people comfortable producing goods.
Misdirection via Distraction: This analysis does not discuss the waste of space, time, and resources used to maintain a large effective army capable of plundering scores of times per day.
The following assumes facts not in evidence:
Plundering is a classic example of the Prisoner’s Dilemna. While plundering is individually beneficial, collectively it is horribly inefficient.
Consider a neighborhood where no one plunders. Each player will feel confident in producing a maximum amount of goods. Ability to trade for needed goods is maximized.
Consider a neighborhood with only 10% plunderers. The plunderers will have a steady stram of goods to plunder. Some of those plunderers may be profitable enough to forego their own goods production. Some habitual whiners will complain about being plundered, Most will adopt their goods schedule to timely collection, incidentally slightly reducing their goods production.
Note that as plundering increases, some ‘victims’ will be upset enough to quit. This of course lowers total goods production.
Consider a neighborhood with 50% plunderers. The plunderers will have to work hard to beat other plunderers to the goods producers. Some of those plunderers may be profitable enough to forego their own goods production. Other less successful plunderers will need to rely on their own goods production, becoming targets for other plunderers. Some habitual whiners will complain about being plundered. Most will adopt their goods schedule to timely collection, incidentally slightly reducing their goods production.
Consider a neighborhood with 100% plunderers. Good news is nobody whines about being plundered. (Note this applies to a relatively balanced neighborhood, an unbalanced neighborhood will always produce whiners.) Otherwise there is little to no production of goods because any uncollected goods are immediately plundered.
Unjustifiable Conclusion: It’s better for everybody if no one plunders. But since that ain’t gonna happen you should be plundering.
The oddity of this is that people who understand plundering is highly effective keep arguing with players who do not plunder. Since the fewer people who plunder, the more successful plundering is, recruiting more plunderers is counterproductive.
So when yet again some whiny poor thinking do-gooder posts about how plundering is an evil atrocity against the spirit of the game, just like Hitler and Nazis, or some other fallacy, instead of arguing with the yutz, agree with him. Then go plunder his ass.
Useless Maxim: The maximum amount of goods in a neighborhood is based on the number of people comfortable producing goods.
Misdirection via Distraction: This analysis does not discuss the waste of space, time, and resources used to maintain a large effective army capable of plundering scores of times per day.
The following assumes facts not in evidence:
Plundering is a classic example of the Prisoner’s Dilemna. While plundering is individually beneficial, collectively it is horribly inefficient.
Consider a neighborhood where no one plunders. Each player will feel confident in producing a maximum amount of goods. Ability to trade for needed goods is maximized.
Consider a neighborhood with only 10% plunderers. The plunderers will have a steady stram of goods to plunder. Some of those plunderers may be profitable enough to forego their own goods production. Some habitual whiners will complain about being plundered, Most will adopt their goods schedule to timely collection, incidentally slightly reducing their goods production.
Note that as plundering increases, some ‘victims’ will be upset enough to quit. This of course lowers total goods production.
Consider a neighborhood with 50% plunderers. The plunderers will have to work hard to beat other plunderers to the goods producers. Some of those plunderers may be profitable enough to forego their own goods production. Other less successful plunderers will need to rely on their own goods production, becoming targets for other plunderers. Some habitual whiners will complain about being plundered. Most will adopt their goods schedule to timely collection, incidentally slightly reducing their goods production.
Consider a neighborhood with 100% plunderers. Good news is nobody whines about being plundered. (Note this applies to a relatively balanced neighborhood, an unbalanced neighborhood will always produce whiners.) Otherwise there is little to no production of goods because any uncollected goods are immediately plundered.
Unjustifiable Conclusion: It’s better for everybody if no one plunders. But since that ain’t gonna happen you should be plundering.
The oddity of this is that people who understand plundering is highly effective keep arguing with players who do not plunder. Since the fewer people who plunder, the more successful plundering is, recruiting more plunderers is counterproductive.
So when yet again some whiny poor thinking do-gooder posts about how plundering is an evil atrocity against the spirit of the game, just like Hitler and Nazis, or some other fallacy, instead of arguing with the yutz, agree with him. Then go plunder his ass.
